## OUTLINE OF HERTZ'S BOOK "AGRARIAN QUESTIONS"

**Engels's error regarding America (p. 31)**

Proprietary interests in agriculture (p. 2, 3).
The peasant — entrepreneur.
("Wordplay") (p. 4) (p. 5) and p. 8–9.
Small-scale enterprise — their farms with 1–2 hired workers (p. 6, footnote 15)
No class antagonism between small-scale enterprise and hired workers (p. 6).
Concerning secondary occupations (p. 9)
There are no absolute advantages for large-scale farming (p. 40) (p. 60) (60–65)
Threshers: labor cheap in winter: p. 65
Harvests in France p. 49.
Small-scale enterprise not averse to machines p. 52 (sweeping generalizations about France). Cf. 81 (strongly??)
On the sale of milk: p. 113.

M. Hecht: 68 and 79 and others ("excellent")
Harvests in East Elbian and South German territories (66).
Auhagen: 70–71.

Rise in harvests after the introduction of the steam plow (67)
1/2 to 1/4: the advantage of the steam plow!
Among latifundia in Austria there are model farms: p. 45 (against Bulgakov)
America: the absence of small parcels permits the employment of machines; there is no such low-standing peasantry (p. 36) and 45, 44.

Contra. Small-scale enterprise applies comparatively more labor (74). For the majority of peasants—primitive technique.
Labor-rent of the peasant: p. 89–90 (! !)
The petty agriculturist resorts to secondary occupations: 94 cf. 92.
Growth in the number of proprietors in France 52 (??)
There is no rural industry in France 53 (??)
Overstatement regarding small-plot farming (in part) 53.
Refutation of Kautsky's assertion about hired labor among petty peasants 55.

Hertz on N—one etc. (p. 12).
(Cf. Chernov)
Is monetary economy the better path? (p. 20).
Small-plot rental — the goal of capitalism: p. 21.
Industrialization of production: unfounded hopes of Kautsky (87–88).

Demands must be directly attainable — contra public property in land (p. 7).
P. 10: on the economic utility of capitalism, there is still dispute.
P. 14. Socialism relates to capitalism perhaps the same way that Russian capitalism relates to patriarchal economy.
Only the greater share!
Echo of natural-law views: p. 72–73.
Elimination of the opposition between city and countryside. p. 76.
In agriculture an imperceptible lever of egotism: 95.
What will socialism do with office workers. 93.
On social revolution: 105.
123: Centralized conduct of agriculture is absolutely impossible (!!).

"The main task of socialism" — support of cooperatives (p. 21) and p. 89.
121: Cooperatives for small producers
And for large—socialization.
Hertz's cooperatives 120
Cooperatives: "enter into" socialism (111).
Number of members in cooperatives (112)
Dairy cooperatives (112)
On Engels concerning cooperatives
from "inverted" 122.

**"Theory"**
On mortgages
Engels on America

On the peasantry versus the proletariat
On large and small production
Hecht, Auhagen, etc.
Recognition of the superiority of large-scale production
Recognition of overwork in small-scale enterprise
Hertz on French data
Hertz and Narodism
— attitude toward socialism
— cooperatives.

## MATERIALS FOR A CRITIQUE OF V. CHERNOV'S AGRARIAN VIEWS

**A LIST OF V. CHERNOV'S ARTICLES.**

Chernov. Types of Capitalist and Agrarian Evolution,
*Russian Wealth* 1900.
Art. 1. Types of National Capitalism.
Art. II. Types of Agrarian Evolution, 
1908*
*Russian Wealth* 1900.
On the Question of Capitalist and Agrarian Evolution.
"At a Glorious Post." V. Chernov.
"The Peasant and the Worker, etc."
I–III. p. 127–157
IV
V
VI

## V. CHERNOV. TYPES OF CAPITALIST AND AGRARIAN EVOLUTION.

No. 4/127: "For the first time the agrarian question broke through in Orthodox Marxism."
129. From Kautsky's book "barely dedicated to an analysis of figures and facts of agrarian evolution."
130. "Vulgarization" of Marxism by means of "commonplaces," "clichés"
131–"ossified dogma"
131. Russian non-Marxists "are in good company with the 'critics' of Marxism."
(134) "Russian sociological school"
131. The aim of the article—"to have a discussion about Hertz's book"
133. Definition of "capitalism" in Hertz.
135–136. The dogmatists think that all strive to develop alike; the critics—that there are different types of development (a lie against the dogmatists).
137. Hertz's mockery ("malice"?) at K. Kautsky: now England is the model, now it has ceased to be one (?).
137–138. It is "archaic" to assert that Russia will follow the path of the "West."
— 139. No, there is no general type of "West." (Capitalism in Russia has "begun working"). It is strange that people "proud" of not believing in the possibility of Russia avoiding capitalism—"are breaking through an open door" (!).
140. The "positive" side belongs not to capitalism, not to form, but to content, "combination of forces," cooperation.
141. Hertz's "diagnosis" is reliable... Distortion of the words—lack of development of capitalism.
142–156. "Types" of English, French, and German capitalism. According to Sombart and phrases.

A further note in the manuscript reads: "see separate sheet." On the "separate sheet" (arch. no. 19087) the following paragraph is recorded.

**Sombart's paraphrase—Chernov's own opinion in the following taste:**

Here we have everything: both the "proud, independent, energetic character of the Briton" (143–144) and the "solidity" of English bourgeoisie (145) and the "unpleasantness" (146) of its foreign policy—and the "passionate, captivating temperament of the Romantic race" (149) and the "narrow-sectarian spirit of the French proletariat" (148)—and "German precision" (152).

157. Hertz's book—a "guidebook" (!).
No. 5/30. The agrarian question was "outside the field of vision of old Marxism."
31—"for old Marxism the agrarian question did not exist at all."
32. Words of Marx from 1861.
33–35. The agrarian question at the congresses of the International;
35. Classification of Rettingausen as one of the "dogmatic Marxists"
(and "solidarized communes").
36–39. W. Liebknecht (*Zur Grund- und Bodenfrage*) — "dogmatic Marxism."
39. "Utterly negative attitude toward the peasantry" ("the sin" of "contemporary dogmatic Marxism").
40. W. Liebknecht: "commune," the village = "natural association."
41. Liebknecht's agrarian program in 1876.
42. Engels in an article on the German peasant ("Restore the Mark") — "the same solidarized commune" (! !)
45. Sieber on the "commune" in the "depths of the soul" of the Irish people.
45. The commune as "a means to shorten the path of economic development, to find more direct ways to transition to higher forms."
46. "Everything that develops and strengthens peasant farming is progressive"—a conclusion from Liebknecht.
47. Two types of agrarian evolution: 1) capitalist; 2) non-capitalist, with the development of agricultural cooperation.
47. ..."support of the commune."
48. "Theory of non-capitalist evolution of agriculture."
No. 6/203. A. Bebel: "*Unsere Ziele*," "weaknesses" of his work.
205. Bebel's agrarian program. (Against the transformation of communal lands into private property).
205. "The Erfurt Program"—"analogical method."
206. Kampfmeyer's project of 1891 ("remote from directness").
207. Vollmar in Frankfurt in 1894.
208. "Work of one's own family," "cheap rural life," etc.
209. Is it indifferent "in the highest economic sense" whether capital's rule is direct or indirect? Form and content of capitalism. Their "contradiction."
Form—anti-social, parasitic principle. Content—social principle, association.

210. Improper separation of how form "suppresses" content and vice versa.
211. Marx on usury.
A note against K. Kautsky ("all the cleverness").
212. Marx on usury.
212–213. Marx on Irish tenants.
— "Our Goals." [Editorial note]

213. Russian "redemption payments"—the predominance of the form of capitalism (?) over content.
213. Gumplowicz on hothouse cultivation in England (note by N. Karyshev).
215. Marx on the agrarian question.
216. Among the characteristics of capitalism, Chernov points out "rationalization," but omits the displacement of serf relations.
218. Marx did not know the true dimensions of the significance of biological sciences for agriculture.
218–220. Working period and time of production.
220–222. Much prevents the equalization of profit in agriculture (in particular, non-capitalist producers).
230. Against Fischer, who distinguishes pauperization from proletarianization: Marx says, he says, that the rural worker is always already a pauper.
231. ..."The Morality of History."
231. "From Marx's analysis flows the very same (!! N.B.) formulation"..."in agriculture the content of capitalism is suppressed by form," "and therefore is observed especially strong development of negative aspects of capitalism over (?) positive ones."

No. 7/153. Two "directions" in Marxism and their "eclectic" union—... an inevitable crisis of the "dogma"—...the agricultural crisis strikes first of all against the most advanced farms—
154. In 1848 Marx thought that peasants, insofar as they struggle with capitalism for their economic existence, are an element unconditionally reactionary.
154. "Daily destruction" of peasantry...
Communist Manifesto? P. 13..."destroyed and destroys daily"—
155. In 1898 this is "dogmatism and superstition of inertia."
156. Engels in 1894.
157. Engels: Denmark is an example. Conclusion "from Engels":
158. "The transitional form (to socialism) is cooperation, having the commune as its basis, and not only capitalism."
159. ..."Another path"..."New theory of agrarian evolution."
159. "Agrarian program" (German)—"its weak sides" "rather questionable."
160. Project of a program. Tendency: support of the peasant commune and cooperation.
162. "A series of practical, positive measures" "ensuring the laboring peasantry an 'other path'"—the main tendency of the agrarian program.
163–164. Orthodox = Catholic. Capitalism = purgatory for the "petty-bourgeois peasant, liberating him from the "fanaticism of property" (!). (Clever mockeries!)
164. Cooperation—a path to capitalism... Just as "municipal collectivism."
165. Kautsky admits municipal socialism. (Falsity!)
166. Kautsky refers to Russian comrades. Who? (for example).
167. K. Kautsky himself found that peasantry is a "splendid object for influence" (?) "Zigzag course" (!! )
169. ..."have not even mastered what is in Marx"...
No. 8/201. "The dogmatists retreated from their old position" "with a caveat"...204: "The Grand Inquisitor of dogmatism."
202. "Ardent adherents" see in Kautsky's book (*Agrarian Question*) "epoch-making" [work].
202. K. Kautsky's book—capitulation on many points: a concession to the critical direction.
203. K. Kautsky "yields to Hertz before the onslaught of criticism" (203–204):
(1) In England there is no expected disappearance of small production—Communist Manifesto (??)
(2) In America there is no...—Engels in 1882 (Manifesto)?
(gradually is overcome. Russian translation, p. 9 "all" and "perishes" in Chernov's version) ("erliegt mehr und mehr" Engels in the exemplary translation p. 5 of the Manifesto).
(3) In agriculture the process is more complex (??? cf. Capital, III, 2, ?).
204. "Dogmatic Marxism in the sphere of agrarian questions has been dislodged from its position" (!) This needs no demonstration.
205–206. Speaking of contemporary large-scale farming, K. Kautsky means "those set up most rationally" (206). Incorrect. (Falsity, cf. the passages from Kautsky himself that he cites).
206. (1) Kautsky compares routine peasant farms with advanced large ones.
206–209. M. Hecht: Turn the arguments against Kautsky.
[...what falls is not the contemporary but backward small farm...]
210. (2) Kautsky emphasizes state aid to small farms, and forgets about aid to large ones (Chernov distorts Kautsky's argument).
211. (3) Overwork and underconsumption.
212. —"one-sidedness": Large-scale farming belittles the farm laborer.
213. So too Chernov did not understand Kautsky's argument about the overcrowding of small production.
214–215. The number of small independent farms in agriculture grows, while the number of proletarians decreases.
215. Kautsky does not fundamentally deny that small farming in agriculture is more advantageous than large.
216–217. Kautsky does not distinguish capitalist large-scale farming from peasant farming in general—"a confusion."
218. "The limitedness of soil"..."A concession" (!!) to Breslavl's polemics.
219. Large production is not always more advantageous. "A concession" to David...
220–221. "Is it clear whether one can speak of intensification" (during a crisis!).
221. Kautsky ignores that large production is superior only in grain farming. (Incorrect: p. 115 *Agrarian Question*)
222–224. Gumplowicz: in agriculture a tendency toward individual production.
225–226. Chernov is for large-scale farming of associated producers, does not want to defend the "positive mission of capitalism," but does not perceive the weaknesses "of fragmented farming."
227. Mortgage and latifundia (K. Kautsky's).
228. Chernov: "Form" eats up content. There is no unifying action here whatsoever (Regarding latifundia—and mortgages—incorrect) ("an incorrigible dogmatist" K. Kautsky).
229. All the development of agronomy after Liebig has "passed without a trace" for K. Kautsky, "(Helplessly repeats Marx" (?? K. Kautsky, 51–52. Cf. 211).
"Rudimentary view of Kautsky."
233. "Concession" (against the Erfurt Program)—that small farming is sometimes conditioned (mutually) by large.
234. "So where did the dogma of the positive mission go?" Insufficient viability is displayed by capitalism, not by the peasantry, when capitalism creates small landholding.
235. "Will the countryside want to be passive? submit to the city?"
236. K. Kautsky—"an eclectic."... (Engels foresaw war with the peasantry!)
236. Kautsky's "industriocentrism."
238. Nikolai—one: "remarkable skill and scientific precision," "estimated the significance of the purchasing power of the rural population for industry" (!!!).
238. "Industriomorphism"...Kautsky's "faded, discolored dogma," "diluted."
239. Gatti: Kautsky—"the old dogma," "superficiality of view," etc.
No. 10/212. K. Kautsky—"an attempt at disguised retreat of orthodoxy from a number of positions."
— "Dogmatism, bias, distortion, absence of directness and the search for truth."
213. "Hertz decisively takes the side of Nikolai—one."
214–215. In the Austrian Alps peasants are ruined. They are replaced by hunting grounds of the rich. And this is "progress"?—Hertz asks (!)
216. 1) In the sphere of mortgages—decentralization. (Hertz).
216–217. "Amusing contradiction" of Kautsky's: "the proletarian expropriates the proprietor" (mortgaged).
217. Kautsky does not answer a word either to Hertz or to Meyer.
219. K. Kautsky "capitulated" on the question of America ("but from 219–220. Hertz "with exemplary clarity" refuted the "desperate attempts to save the remnants of dogmatism."
221–222. Errors of Liebknecht on France.
223. Hertz on French agriculture: compares by regions. Hertz—for the study of peculiarities.
224. Einaudi: three different zones in Piedmont.
226. Gatti. "Peculiarities of agriculture": 1) complex means of production. 2) cost of production.
227. 3) "resistance of the natural environment" (!).
229. Marxists have one goal and "a uniform method" (!!!).
Two methods: capitalist and cooperative.
232–235. And Vandervelde recognizes two paths: capitalist and cooperative.
233–234. Belgian project for the socialization of dairy production: "without capitalism"!!
234. Collapse of Engels's predictions about Belgium. [distortion].
234–235. Fligen: (where?) in Holland the development of small production (terribly exploited by capital).
236. Arnheim (Holland) agrarian program (for the commune).
236. Western European thought—the same thing that a well-known part of our literature has long asserted. (Kablucov).
237. "Excellent," "superior" works of Kablucov.
237. Agrarian capitalism has not fulfilled its "historical mission."
238–239. Hertz: the tendency (of capitalism)—is "small-plot rental."
240. Hertz (and Chernov). The peasant = "simply a worker," "a person living from his own labor" (of course, there are not taken into account peasants who have become rich or are becoming rich (sic!)—their place is alongside capitalists).
241. Non-capitalist evolution—a field too speculative, unstable.
242. "Theory of non-capitalist evolution"—in embryo.
Not yet passed to generalizing, i.e., substantially scientific work (sic! And K. Kautsky?!).
243. Capitalist evolution—spontaneous. Non-capitalist—"a planned combination of scattered forces." "Direct" opposition to the chief motive force (!) of capitalism (= narrow personal interest).
244. Work—"softening, smoothing, subordination, agreement, working out of harmony"...(for planned coordination)...
— it is necessary to find "the line of least resistance."
245. Hertz: "logical" development of "cooperative forms" (!!)(Hertz 116 and ff., points 1–10).
248. The highest point: a cooperative of wine-growers—owning their own restaurants and shops.
249. "Enormous alleviation"—our "commune."
250. "Narodism." "Infinitely (?) broad concept.
Everyone who does not recognize the theory of unified capitalism (!!!)
— and the necessity of the proletarianization of the peasantry (!!).
250. Should we await the preconditions (of large production)?
(1) — from agrarian capitalism
(2) or "from conscious social creation, relying on the laboring part of the peasantry" (!!).
251. "Perverted" understanding of the disagreement about the peasantry and the commune.
251. The point of view is obsolete—that of those who in the elimination of the commune see the removal of obstacles to development.
252–254. ...The epoch of "agrarian programs"—
255–256. The eclecticism of contemporary Marxists: "fearful" apologies in defending the commune.
256. "Two basic types of agrarian evolution: capitalist and non-capitalist...
"One should prefer the 2nd path," supporting agricultural cooperation and the agricultural commune.
257. Precisely the point of view that was defended by *Fatherland Notes* and *The Contemporary* (!).
258. It is not without reason that he stood for the idea...life...has proven (!) the validity of this idea.

## PAGES FROM MARX'S *CAPITAL* ON THE PROCESS OF CAPITALISM IN AGRICULTURE.

III, 2, 189: agriculture is more difficultly equalized than industry.
III, 2, 189–190: Capital masters agriculture last of all.
III, 2, 190: the transition occurs both from poor land to good and vice versa.
2, 499: Against Ricardo (fertility of soil does not always decrease. Not always the transition from good land to poor).
III, 2, 216: Capitalism seizes agriculture only slowly and unevenly.
III, 2, 220: Ricardo generalizes one case.

## ON THE QUESTION OF CAPITALIST AND AGRARIAN EVOLUTION.

232. The Gratz party conference adopted a program in "essential features analogous."
232–233. Romanian agrarian program: the provision of land to peasant communes.
233. P. Mirescu in *The Beginning* No. 4.
236. Italy. In Bologna (1897) they rejected the agrarian program; in Rome (1900)—
237. —resolution: "To assist the spread of the idea of cooperation."
239. The "most orthodox" (??) Marxists in Austria, France, Belgium, Holland, Italy, Hungary, Denmark, Bavaria (!!), Romania understood the necessity "to support and increase communal landholding."